date_calculator

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the two modes but does not disclose important behavioral details such as whether dates are inclusive/exclusive, how weekends exclusion works, or how invalid dates are handled. This leaves the agent with incomplete information about the tool's behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's two capabilities. There is no unnecessary verbiage, and every word adds value. It is well-structured for quick comprehension.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, two modes) and the absence of an output schema, the description is minimally complete. It does not explain return values, edge cases, or limitations. For a date calculator, more context (like the format of the result or handling of different calendars) would improve completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. It does not elaborate on parameter semantics, such as the formatting requirements for 'days' or the default for 'exclude_weekends' (though schema has default). Hence, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the two primary operations: days between dates or add/subtract days. This is a specific verb-resource combination. However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like 'age_calculator' or 'time_duration_calculator', which may also manipulate dates.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not specify that 'age_calculator' is for age in years or that 'time_duration_calculator' may handle hours/minutes. The agent receives no help in distinguishing use cases.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.